I agree with you, Kataryn - that could well be true. I did write about the possibility that it was Camilla who didn't want to marry Charles back then.

Quote:

Or perhaps Camilla didn't want to marry him back then; Andrew Parker Bowles was a very handsome man in his youth, and Camilla never stroke me as someone who'd marry a man just for his title or position. I think their love was one that developed over the time, unfortunately after both were married.

At the end of the day, one of the reasons I respect Charles and Camilla so much is that they never spoke of their private lives, even to defend themselves.
We don't know what really happened between them, all we can do is guess.

Maybe because it's not a very polite thing (to put it mildly) to say about anyone?
I had no fits of rage, incidentally; just pointed out that the comment is not something personally I would like to be seen in regards to any woman, royal or not.

I agree with you, Kataryn - that could well be true. I did write about the possibility that it was Camilla who didn't want to marry Charles back then.
At the end of the day, one of the reasons I respect Charles and Camilla so much is that they never spoke of their private lives, even to defend themselves.
We don't know what really happened between them, all we can do is guess.

Well Charles did give an interview on TV about his private life with Diana so I don't think you can say he never spoke of it.

Maybe because it's not a very polite thing (to put it mildly) to say about anyone?
I had no fits of rage, incidentally; just pointed out that the comment is not something personally I would like to be seen in regards to any woman, royal or not.

They know you had no "fits of rage". A lot of people have said some wonderful things about Prince Charles here. OTOH, when this thread started describing Prince Charles as "needy, immature and very selfish," I wondered if the opening tone of the thread would invite the "cute", ugly comments about Charles or Camilla, or Camilla's or Charles' appearance, or their relationship, etc. It didn't take very long. There are always people who want to provoke a group or take out their anger at who knows what, on whoever will listen. Camilla is still an easy target - her perceived (to her critics) rival is deceased. Here, in this section of the Forum, they know there are people to hurt with a nasty jab at Camilla, so they go for it.

One thing I like about Charles is that he is who he is. He doesn't try to change with the times or iron out all his little quirks. I think he is a fairly complicated person, with a lot going on under the surface. He's extremely hard working and dedicated. IMO he is, and always has been, a good father, although sometimes I think he might not be the easiest person to have as a family member. I think he's an intelligent man who's made a success of what has to be a difficult position - life long heir to the throne.

On the other hand, I get the impression he's thin skinned and perhaps prone to pettiness. I also wonder if he lacks insight into how his own actions have contributed to the negative situations he's found himself in over the years.

They know you had no "fits of rage". A lot of people have said some wonderful things about Prince Charles here. OTOH, when this thread started describing Prince Charles as "needy, immature and very selfish," I wondered if the opening tone of the thread would invite the "cute", ugly comments about Charles or Camilla, or Camilla's or Charles' appearance, or their relationship, etc. It didn't take very long. There are always people who want to provoke a group or take out their anger at who knows what, on whoever will listen. Camilla is still an easy target - her perceived (to her critics) rival is deceased. Here, in this section of the Forum, they know there are people to hurt with a nasty jab at Camilla, so they go for it.

Charles is who he is. He has been given, by fate a position that allows him to do what he wants. So, he is nice and quite petulant at the same time. He was a miserable husband to his first wife ( he loved someone else and kept her as his lover) and a wonderful husband to his mistress whom, by fate, again, he could marry. Camilla is a target, because she was "the other woman" and to that end she was a problem in their lives. But, to realistic thought she never pushed her way in and it was Charles who was the problem for Diana. Diana was a fool, because she could have had him, he could have been the only villain. She chose otherwise. Charles has little regard for what is outside his realm. Don't tell me about the Princes's Trust. which was fabricated for him, at his name placed on it. You never see him in overalls in someone's home trying to physically help. He is above the fray. He will never work at a Habitat for Humanity, which even some of our presidents do. He doesn't get his hands dirty with human soil, nor does his mother. They smile and give a bit and that is their donation to travail. I, actually, have more respect for Camilla. I, think she knows how to get her hands dirty, in a good way, like Diana.

Countess, you have your view and I disagree with it. He established the Prince's Trust himself with his severance pay from the Navy - his idea and his alone. He has worked to assist the young unemployed of this country and has had great success. You fail to account for the fact that he could have sat on his hands and done nothing. The work that he has done in establishing charitable trusts has been an exemplar for others, including other royal families. He has personally donated money to people in distress, such as those in Wales who have recently been made homeless by flooding.
Working at a "Habitat for Humanity" would not move on the cause it represents one iota - instead he uses the influence he has to improve - by raising £100's millions of pounds. That is far more useful. I think each person should make the best effort to help others as they can. I can give a few ££'s and a few hours. He is better in my eyes for maximising his influence.

__________________

This precious stone set in the silver sea,......This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England,

I've never particularly cared for Charles, I can't really relate to him. But I've always respected him for going green. Charles went green before it went mainstream, and many people ridiculed him, but he stuck to his guns. I do like Camilla a lot more though. She has tough skin which I respect.

__________________"I think the biggest disease the world suffers from in this day and age is the disease of people feeling unloved."
Diana, the Princess of Wales

Anyone wanting to see the real Charles need look no further than this recent documentary. He is an inspirational person.

Thank you for the fabulous documentary on the Dumfries House and His Highness's involvement with it . I've only been able to watch the first half so far (slow Internet), and I'm impressed. I love that Charles took on the project because he wanted to help the community, and I also admire the fact that he's not shy to say what he dislikes about doing something like this (raising money is a 'bother', as he put it, and I can understand how that can be). His sense of humor comes through as well (the interaction with little kids in the beginning of the film and then getting excited about saying 'bling' when viewing the new flats in the community nearby). This man definitely has his heart set on helping others. There's no doubt about that. Now, I'm hoping the second half of the video will load, so I can finish watching it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by cepe

Yes it was. It was formally publsihed in 1980 with proceeds going to the Princes Trust. I've known about it for years as I bought it for a nephew. Here's the wiki link about it

Thank you so much for the link! Just ordered the book on Amazon, and will hopefully use it in my classroom (it's never too early to start teaching the kids about other cultures and countries).

Quote:

Originally Posted by camelot23ca

One thing I like about Charles is that he is who he is. He doesn't try to change with the times or iron out all his little quirks. I think he is a fairly complicated person, with a lot going on under the surface. He's extremely hard working and dedicated. IMO he is, and always has been, a good father, although sometimes I think he might not be the easiest person to have as a family member. I think he's an intelligent man who's made a success of what has to be a difficult position - life long heir to the throne.

On the other hand, I get the impression he's thin skinned and perhaps prone to pettiness. I also wonder if he lacks insight into how his own actions have contributed to the negative situations he's found himself in over the years.

I think this is probably one of my favorite traits of this particular royal. He isn't ashamed of his passions and interests, no matter how quirky and 'weird' they may seem to the rest of the world. He stays true to himself, regardless of criticism. He also strikes me as someone who is very loyal.

__________________"My guiding principles in life are to be honest, genuine, thoughtful and caring".
~Prince William~

I cannot answer or EIIR, but I will for me.
No, I'm not OK with Countess, you or anyone at all making such comments.
It is one thing to dislike a royal; we all have different opinions which we are entitled to. But making offensive remarks for the sake of it - it's just low.

I've often commented on Camilla's and other royal ladies' appearances, favourably and critically, but will never consider offending women who cannot defend themselves. In fact, I tend to avoid any remarks that can pass and offensive (here and in real life) because they lead to no constructive discussion.

Please, do not regard this as a personal attack against you; it is not one - merely an observation. New as I may be to this forum, your dislike for Charles and Camilla is blatantly apparent even to me, which is fine. I respect you and respect your opinion, whether we agree, or not.

Hey guys just wanting to say let's stay on track ok? What kind of man is Charles, let's not replay the divorce debates again.
I'm still stuck on the fact that he wrote a book for his baby brother, that is so cute! I do frequently wonder what kind of brother he is and how they all interact. I believe he and Anne were once quite close.

Hey guys just wanting to say let's stay on track ok? What kind of man is Charles, let's not replay the divorce debates again.
I'm still stuck on the fact that he wrote a book for his baby brother, that is so cute! I do frequently wonder what kind of brother he is and how they all interact. I believe he and Anne were once quite close.

I hadn't been aware of the book before it was pointed out in this thread; a really sweet gesture of him to write a book for his little brothers.
In one of the interviews, Prince Charles mentioned that because of the age difference, he felt like a second father for Andrew and Edward.
As for Anne, in the early pictures of them they appear to be very close, with Charles appearing to have been a very protective big brother.

Hey guys just wanting to say let's stay on track ok? What kind of man is Charles, let's not replay the divorce debates again.

I'm sorry, XeniaCasaraghi, but I think the way each person perceives Charles' behavior in his marriage is a big factor in how to judge the kind of man he is. I believe the fact that he never publicly criticized Diana is a major indication that he is basically a good man and a good father. He certainly made some major mistakes in his marriage, but you can say that about every other divorced person, including Diana.

My impression of Charles?
Sensitive, perhaps overly so.
Kind, intelligent, often witty.
Arrogant, needy, entitled, extravagant (at least, compared to his mother).
Sincerely concerned with things like the environment, architecture, the history and the character of Britain.
Of all the Queen's children, he seems to me to be the one most suited to reign.

He did not appear at his best during that marriage, but then, who could under the circumstances?
Since then he has done his best to earn the respect and love of the British people, and I think he has come a long way towards achieving that goal.

When he finally succeeds to the throne, I suspect everyone (other than a few Diana fanatics who persist in thinking she's a candidate for sainthood) will support him and wish him well.

Charles is who he is. He has been given, by fate a position that allows him to do what he wants. So, he is nice and quite petulant at the same time. He was a miserable husband to his first wife ( he loved someone else and kept her as his lover) and a wonderful husband to his mistress whom, by fate, again, he could marry. Camilla is a target, because she was "the other woman" and to that end she was a problem in their lives. But, to realistic thought she never pushed her way in and it was Charles who was the problem for Diana. Diana was a fool, because she could have had him, he could have been the only villain. She chose otherwise. Charles has little regard for what is outside his realm. Don't tell me about the Princes's Trust. which was fabricated for him, at his name placed on it. You never see him in overalls in someone's home trying to physically help. He is above the fray. He will never work at a Habitat for Humanity, which even some of our presidents do. He doesn't get his hands dirty with human soil, nor does his mother. They smile and give a bit and that is their donation to travail. I, actually, have more respect for Camilla. I, think she knows how to get her hands dirty, in a good way, like Diana.

Oh, Countess, where to start...
Charles is a gardener. That it his hobby. Thus of course he has often dirty hands from gardening, we all have seen the pics of him actually working in his garden.
But why is it so important that he should do menial work when he can achieve so much more doing other things? In my book, for a future Head of State delegational skills are the most important things to have, for lets face it: Heads of State never muck out other people's stables. It doesn't matter if they are born to their position or voted into office - they are there to be proper figureheads at the top of a effectively working organisation. And Charles has been able to build up such a backbone organisation for his work and personal life.

Apart from his first wife, he has been able to get loyality from most people he surrounded himself with and while he might have been at the end of his tether with Diana at one point and after that became a miserable husband, one has to see that Diana became a miserable wife right on their honeymoon when the tantrums started and she turned out to be a completely different woman from the one Charles has proposed marriage to. In my book Diana, whether conscious or not, was a cheat from the beginning when it came to the image she projected of herself and her interestes compared to her true self and wishes.

And even then Charles was unused to such a situation and failed her, like she failed him. Does that make him a hypocrite or just a flawed human being? In my book he is like one of us, but one of the better sort: human but always trying to overcome his faults and to make a positive difference in life.